Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The HC permitted the petitioner to enter the port and take photographs and videos of the vessel, as previously directed by the Additional and District Sessions Judge and upheld by this Court. Despite the petitioner's failure to disclose an earlier CRLMC, the Court allowed the petition due to the innocuous nature of the relief sought. The opposite party was ordered to comply with condition no. III of the prior order dated 12.02.2024, subject to the petitioner paying Rs.10,000/- to the Orissa High Court Bar Association Welfare Fund. Upon submission of the payment receipt, the petitioner was authorized to proceed with photography and videography on 30.04.2025. The receipt was to be scanned and included in the digital record. The petition was thus allowed with costs.
The HC permitted the petitioner to enter the port and take photographs and videos of the vessel, as previously directed by the Additional and District Sessions Judge and upheld by this Court. Despite the petitioner's failure to disclose an earlier CRLMC, the Court allowed the petition due to the innocuous nature of the relief sought. The opposite party was ordered to comply with condition no. III of the prior order dated 12.02.2024, subject to the petitioner paying Rs.10,000/- to the Orissa High Court Bar Association Welfare Fund. Upon submission of the payment receipt, the petitioner was authorized to proceed with photography and videography on 30.04.2025. The receipt was to be scanned and included in the digital record. The petition was thus allowed with costs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
